Is Paul double-dipping on reimbursements?

posted at 2:10 pm on February 6, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

When members of Congress travel back and forth from Washington DC to their home districts, taxpayers reimburse the travel. When presidential candidates travel, the campaign reimburses their travel. What happens when a member of Congress is also a presidential candidate? For Ron Paul, it appears that he gets two reimbursements for the same travel, according to an investigation by Roll Call:

Rep. Ron Paul appears to have been paid twice for flights between Washington, D.C., and his Congressional district, receiving reimbursement from taxpayers and also from a network of political and nonprofit organizations he controlled, according to public records and documents obtained by Roll Call.

Roll Call identified eight flights for which the Texas Republican, a GOP presidential candidate and leading champion of smaller government, was reimbursed twice for the same trip. Roll Call also found dozens more instances of duplicate payments for travel from 1999 to 2009, totaling thousands of dollars’ worth of excess payments, but the evidence in those cases is not as complete.

The campaign denies this, although in part by offering a non-sequitur:

Benton said those flights “may appear to show duplicative reimbursements because Congressman Paul’s wife or a campaign staffer traveled with him. In such instances, the U.S. House would reimburse Congressman Paul’s travel to D.C. for Congressional business, while his campaign or political action committee would reimburse his traveling companion’s ticket.” But Benton declined to discuss any of the trips in detail, arguing that the office does not have records for many of the years in question and that Roll Call was using “stolen” credit card records as the basis for the story.

What would “stolen credit cards” have to do with a story about double-dipping on reimbursements? They did get records from American Express about the corporate credit card for Paul’s firm, and the records reviewed by Roll Call show Rep. Paul as the listed traveler in matching transactions:

The available records name Paul as the traveler in most cases. In other cases in which tickets were purchased for Paul’s wife, Carol, or for staffers, those tickets — identifiable by distinct prices, dates and flight paths — were reimbursed separately. In one case, Paul used a company credit card in his name to buy a ticket for his then-deputy chief of staff; Paul was then reimbursed by his Congressional office and also by his campaign.

Roll Call obtained copies of credit card statements for a corporate American Express card assigned to Ron Paul & Associates Inc. on which many flights were purchased. The flight details on those statements matched payment records filed to the Federal Election Commission and office expenses itemized in quarterly Congressional disbursement statements published by the Chief Administrative Officer of the House.

For example, on March 24, 2003, Paul purchased a round-trip flight from Washington, D.C., to Houston for $651.50. Several weeks later, filings with the FEC show, the Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul paid $651.50 for the Continental Airlines ticket. Congressional expenditure records show Paul also was reimbursed $651.50 by taxpayers for the same flight.

Paul filed articles of dissolution for Ron Paul & Associates Inc. in 2001 with the Texas secretary of state, but the company’s corporate credit card was used for years afterward, the records show.

So the card was stolen, but the thief was kind enough to keep booking travel for Rep. Paul? Er … riiiiiiiiight. [See update below.]

If Roll Call’s investigation bears out, then this raises a few questions. Exactly where did the money go from the duplicate reimbursements? Will the FEC and the House Ethics Committee open their own investigation into Paul’s activities? For that matter, if Paul himself was reimbursed, that might have implications for the IRS as well.

I’ll guess that Paul’s office and campaign will shortly prepare amended disclosures for the trips in question — and write a few checks to cover the funds, too.

Update: A few commenters have pointed out that Benton (who is a good guy, BTW) meant that the records were stolen, not the card. Which is even less applicable to a defense.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I’m pretty sure Benton meant the records were stolen so, since it wasn’t from some report they just turned in, the campaign didn’t have the receipts handy and are probably busy at the moment.

Ron Paul gave up his PENSION because he thought it was immorally rich to have at taxpayer expense when they were stuck with social security. He gave up an athletic scholorship to college which was offered despite a knee injury, because he was concerned he wouldn’t be able to compete.

that’s just the tip of the iceberg, the reason he doesn’t want to release his tax returns, is not, as he jokingly described them as “meager”, it has to do with widespread systematic fraud, and the connections to the liberty lobby and William Carto and David Duke. He made millions of the Ron Paul report, which advocated race-hatred and anti-semitism, and he gets millions from his minions in these “money bombs”.

stuff like this is also disturbing:

In 1981, a lawyer tried to subpoena Ron Paul to testify in the trial of Don Black, a Grand Wizard for the Ku Klux Klan who would later go on to found the white supremacist, neo-Nazi website, Stormfront. Black was charged along with two other Klansmen with planning to violently overthrow the small Caribbean country of Dominica in what they called “Operation Red Dog.” While a judge refused to subpoena Paul, Don Black would come back to haunt him many years later.

In 1981 a group of American and Canadian white supremacists lead by Klansman and mercenary, Michael (Mike) Perdue planned on taking over a small West Indian country called Dominica by overthrowing the government and Prime Minister Eugenia Charles and restoring its previous prime minister, Patrick Johns into power. The group planned to create an Aryan paradise in Dominica and make money through casinos, cocaine and brothels.

On the day the group of white supremacists were supposed to travel to Dominica, they were arrested by ATF agents and were found with over thirty automatic weapons, shotguns, rifles, handguns, dynamite, ammunition, a confederate flag and a Nazi flag. The plan would be dubbed “The Bayou Of Pigs” after the failed invasion of Cuba.

The leader of the group, Michael Perdue, would plead guilty to planning the coup and turned state’s evidence. Perdue would testify that several other people helped organize and fund the coup and that two Texas politicians were aware of the plan. Among those Perdue implicated were infamous white supremacist, David Duke, former Texas Governor, John Connally and Congressman, Ron Paul whom he claimed knew about the plot. Connally was credited with helping Paul win his first congressional election.

A judge refused to subpoena Paul and Connally despite the fact that Perdue had claimed that both of them were aware of the plot. Don Black’s friend and fellow KKK Grand Wizard, David Duke was called to testify before a grand jury but claimed that he would take the Fifth Amendment and never testified. While Duke was never charged with a crime, several books points to Duke as the organizer who connected Perdue to the other mercenary Klansmen and the people who funded their endeavor. (1 2 3) Everyone else implicated by Perdue was charged with the plot.

I’ll guess that Paul’s office and campaign will shortly prepare amended disclosures for the trips in question — and write a few checks to cover the funds, too.

For what, exactly. The article makes clear the US Government was billed only once per trip. And there is no evidence that the other tickets, purchased by C4L or his campaign, that there wasn’t someone else (Wife, staff) who came along.

About ten minutes of rational thought, and this entire story starts to fall apart. There are no duplicate payments, at all.

First, Roll Call has credit card records for one card, an Amex assigned to Ron Paul and Associates.

Ron Paul buys a plane ticket with the credit card. Then, one of his groups pays the bill:

For example, on March 24, 2003, Paul purchased a round-trip flight from Washington, D.C., to Houston for $651.50. Several weeks later, filings with the FEC show, the Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul paid $651.50 for the Continental Airlines ticket. Congressional expenditure records show Paul also was reimbursed $651.50 by taxpayers for the same flight.

Ron Paul himself never technically paid for the tickets. The credit card company did, and the credit card company was then paid by one of Paul’s organizations:

Documents indicate those organizations sent checks to American Express for those items, while Paul received payments from the House for the same expenses.

Notice that payments were not sent to Ron Paul. Ron Paul would only be double dipping if he personally paid the credit card bill and then pocketed reimbursements from both the government and one of his entities. Nothing in this article shows or proves that that happened.

For all we know, Paul may have given the goverment funds back to his entities to make up the difference. We don’t know, and that itself may be a problem. But that story is a lot less than it appears to be.

Public records show hundreds of flight payments between 1999 and 2009 in which both the House and Paul’s campaign paid for plane tickets of the same price and about the same date. Given the limitations of publicly reported data, in many of those cases it’s not possible to conclude that the matching flight payments represent duplicate reimbursements, because the possibility of an alternate traveler cannot be disproved. Paul has not been accused of wrongdoing by any authorities.

And:

“Congressman Paul has taken many thousands of commercial flights between Houston and Washington, D.C., since returning to Congress in 1997. The particular flights Roll Call provided us as examples occurred between 1999 and 2005, well before the current time periods for which the FEC and IRS require records to be maintained.”

So, did you miss that part, Ed? Or were you being deliberately Frothy?

Paul also has specifically advertised the Spartan spending habits in his Congressional office, boasting in press releases in 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 about the amount of unused money he was returning to the Treasury from his budget for the previous year

I am no fan of Ron Paul, but I say innocent until proven guilty.

It appears to me that Roll Call is trying to paint him as a hypocrite when he talks about his frugality.

Notice that payments were not sent to Ron Paul. Ron Paul would only be double dipping if he personally paid the credit card bill and then pocketed reimbursements from both the government and one of his entities. Nothing in this article shows or proves that that happened.

For all we know, Paul may have given the goverment funds back to his entities to make up the difference. We don’t know, and that itself may be a problem. But that story is a lot less than it appears to be.

Mr. Arkadin on February 6, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Transparent BS. Somebody paid the CC bill for Paul, and Paul submitted expense reports to the government for the charges and was reimbursed from tax $$.

In other words, we reimbursed him for an expense he never incurred, best case.

It’s small potatoes, but it stinks to high heaven, especially coming from the camp of the small government purist-in-chief.

Weird, but not necessarily bad: Paul charges ticket on company card for $656.50. Campaign pays credit card company bill for $656.50. Government reimburses Paul personally for $656.50. Net gain for Paul, Inc.? 0.

Did Paul reimburse the campaign, making this essentially a circuitous accounting move? We don’t know, the story doesn’t say. Now, there may still be a problem if Paul is being reimbursed by the government for campaign business unrelated to his role as a Congressman. There may still be a problem if this is some kind of dodge to funnel campaign funds to Paul’s personal accounts. But that is not what the story alleges. Based on its own premise, the story is false.

Having (sort of) known Ron Paul since the 1980s, I would rule out any deliberate double-dipping on his part.

However, he has never shown any inclination to keep close track of his own finances. Some careless co-mingling of funs led to significant quantities of money being siphoned off by a long-time employee back in 1988,

If his friend and mine, the late Burt Blumert was not riding herd on things for him, confusion reigned. Burt always said that Ron Paul’s main problem was an attention span of under 5 minutes and that on a good day with a subject that interested him greatly.

(this is also way he let racist and other inflamatory charges fly under his radar)

An astute traveler would charge all travel on the corporate/campaign card, have those people pay all the bills in full and then seek partial reimbursement from the Congressional office—-and seek slightly less than that to which they were entitled. However, that would require a systemic and enfilading approach to things that does not appear to be forthcoming.

Now I am a neocon. But since I am a PALEO neocon, I now give you a new take on Ron Paul’s relations with the military.

His entire professional (MD) career has been based on the long-suffering taxpayers back channeled to him by the Military Industrial Conspiracy. That is how he got his medical degree.

He took Curtis LeMay’s shilling and proceeded to do The Bomber’s willing. He saw to it that air crews who would otherwise have faced unemployment remained always healthy enough to launch their
huge jets skyward at a moments notice ever able to ruthlessly
incinerate millions of innocent progressives and otherwise unconstituionally intervene in the affairs of foreign hegemonies.

This lame attempt to put a thumb on the scales against Ron Paul does little to help Santorum. If anything, it just enhances Romney’s easy path to the nomination by diminishing Paul. Paul staying in this race actually helps the other candidates to remain viable and to counter the establishment meme of Romney inevitability.

Transparent BS. Somebody paid the CC bill for Paul, and Paul submitted expense reports to the government for the charges and was reimbursed from tax $$.

In other words, we reimbursed him for an expense he never incurred, best case.

peski on February 6, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Well, no.

The credit card statements reviewed by Roll Call include handwritten notations that indicate several organizations — Paul’s campaign, Liberty Political Action Committee (“Liberty PAC”), the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education and another nonprofit called the Liberty Committee — would pay for many of the flights.

Documents indicate those organizations sent checks to American Express for those items, while Paul received payments from the House for the same expenses.

Paul is entitled to be reimbursed by the Federal government for travel related to Congressional matters. In both instances where details are given in the article, Paul was flying from/to D.C. and Houston, making it highly likely that the flights fell under Paul’s Congressional privileges. No where does the article state that any of the flights where there was government reimbursement looked to have been related to the campaign, although the campaign may have paid the bills. This could be a simple case of Paul’s campaign paying for legitimate government trips, and then the money coming back via Paul. That’s an odd way of doing things, but neither immoral nor illegal.

I really think it would be really comical to ever read another Paul supporter complain about any perceived lack of civility, Boy.

You’re a coward until you grow the balls and explain what is meant by the term you use for Senator Santorum, Boy. Till then, every time I see you use it I think to myself, what a gutless coward devoid of any real manhood, Boy.

Remember, if dirt is brought up on any other candidate, its a reason they are unfit for the presidency. But if dirt is brought up on Ron Paul, it’s merely a conspiratorial smear campaign. Because he’s like the only true conservative. Or something.

You’re a coward until you grow the balls and explain what is meant by the term you use for Senator Santorum, Boy. Till then, every time I see you use it I think to myself, what a gutless coward devoid of any real manhood, Boy.

Didnt you hear? He’s more prepared for the coming government declaration of martial law and the seizure of public property than anyone else. Why he’s more prepared for combat than those of us with military training and actual combat experience. (Just ask him, he’ll tell you.)

Yeah, do you want to explain what the term you guys use for Senator Santorum means?

hawkdriver on February 6, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Frothy + Santorum. Paulbots, always the classy ones trying to get our votes. Any inkling of respect I had for them is now gone. Perhaps its time for a purge. The truther stormfronter crowd can go back to Prison Planet where they belong.

Who are “you guys”? I assume you are talking about frothy? It’s because he gets real worked up and froths at the mouth…not literally, but he gets pretty worked up. Not the worst nickname for candidates I have seen on here.

Didnt you hear? He’s more prepared for the coming government declaration of martial law and the seizure of public property than anyone else. Why he’s more prepared for combat than those of us with military training and actual combat experience. (Just ask him, he’ll tell you.)

Logboy on February 6, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Not at all. I have no intention of fighting it out with a US Government that has declared martial law if I don’t have to.

I’ve had a long back and forth inner struggle. And honestly, I have worked to find it within myself to support Paul if he got the nod. The basic rationale being anyone is better than President Obama, right? Right. It takes a single thread on Hot Air to reaffirm the absolute worst of the political spectrum are a good portion of his most ardent supporters and they remind me why it would be imperative to not vote for him.

Who are “you guys”? I assume you are talking about frothy? It’s because he gets real worked up and froths at the mouth…not literally, but he gets pretty worked up. Not the worst nickname for candidates I have seen on here.

Ok. That’s what I mean when I say it. I am not privy to other secret meanings.

iwasbornwithit on February 6, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Really? You going to stick with that? You had no idea the connotation that was planned by carpet bombing the internet with that filth? Yet you’ve picked it up because you what, read someone else use it and thought it sounded funny? Now you claim you have some more innocent version of it you’re comfortable using because you won’t admit what a disgusting thing it is to say about another human being?

Paulbots, always the classy ones trying to get our votes. Any inkling of respect I had for them is now gone. Perhaps its time for a purge. The truther stormfronter crowd can go back to Prison Planet where they belong.

Logboy on February 6, 2012 at 8:19 PM

I’ve had a long back and forth inner struggle. And honestly, I have worked to find it within myself to support Paul if he got the nod. The basic rationale being anyone is better than President Obama, right? Right. It takes a single thread on Hot Air to reaffirm the absolute worst of the political spectrum are a good portion of his most ardent supporters and they remind me why it would be imperative to not vote for him.

hawkdriver on February 6, 2012 at 8:28 PM

I have never been uncivil here and most of the comments by Paul supporters are civil as well. You may not agree with them, but it seems to me that there is far more personal venom directed at Paul supporters than vice-versa. I’m not sure that being called a “paultard” is less offensive than “frothy”, especially when one is directed at a candidate and the other is a personal attack against fellow commenters. I, for one, would love to engage fellow commenters in a substantive debate about Ron Paul. Unfortunately, some of the more intellectually lazy commenters here would rather cut off debate by referring to Ron Paul and his supporters as anti-semitic, racist and most often, bat—- insane. So forgive me if I disagree with who the bad actors are here. And we obviously disagree, but for my part, I don’t dislike you and I won’t insult you because you support a different candidate.

I have never been uncivil here and most of the comments by Paul supporters are civil as well. You may not agree with them, but it seems to me that there is far more personal venom directed at Paul supporters than vice-versa.

iwasbornwithit on February 6, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Clearly you missed all the other Paul threads. Hawk and I have hit almost all of them. The racist newsletters threads were the best. “Whats wrong with what he said?” Yes, they were that bad. Galt like to tell people he disagrees with to STFU.

Yes. As a Paul supporter and a religious reader of HA, I play pretty close attention to what is said by Paul supporters and Paul haters. I do not recall anyone saying that they supported the content of the newsletters, but someone probably did at some point. Do you have any examples to point to? I have personally been referred to as racist and anti-semitic for the crime of supporting Ron Paul. There is actually more animosity against Paul supporters here than there is against Obama supporters. I would vote for Rick Santorum over Obama in a heartbeat.

Yes. As a Paul supporter and a religious reader of HA, I play pretty close attention to what is said by Paul supporters and Paul haters. I do not recall anyone saying that they supported the content of the newsletters, but someone probably did at some point. Do you have any examples to point to? I have personally been referred to as racist and anti-semitic for the crime of supporting Ron Paul. There is actually more animosity against Paul supporters here than there is against Obama supporters. I would vote for Rick Santorum over Obama in a heartbeat.

iwasbornwithit on February 6, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Okay, right off the bat, Paul-supporters and Paul-Haters? Should I waste my time and direct you to the beginning of just this thread?

Yep. The military that already spends more than all of the other militaries in the world combined. Thank god the neoconservative wing of the GOP has idiots like you to keep on supporting establishment candidates. Spartan lifestyle is best lifestyle!

Lord on February 6, 2012 at 2:23 PM

That was the first exchange I had with him. Then JohnGalt23 and you start the “Frothy” crap about Santorum. Please. I’ have called JG23 a coward before and I’ll do it again. Why, because he always goes there first and he has a history and deserves much more than he gets in return. He’s your number one Paul fan here and he represents you all.

Hey Ed, your really hate Paul don’t you. Make sure you post any negative thing you can find about him regardless if it’s true or not. Good grief, pathetic. Those other 3 candidate choices are really good. Make sure you write some other pieces on how conservative they are. They are real winners.

I’m not the one making the claim logboy, so I’m not going to search for you. Regardless of what was said, it’s silly to say you wouldn’t vote for someone based on internet comments.

iwasbornwithit on February 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM

You wanted evidence, I told you where to find it. But I’m not about to spend time searching to try and prove anything to you, especially when you show up late to the game. If you’re like the other Paulbots you’d just deny its existence anyway. I have many reasons for not voting for Paul based on his own lunacy and history of craziness and questionable associations to fringe groups. “Internet comments” have nothing to do with my feelings on Paul, and everything to do with the tactics and moral depravity of his followers. There have been numerous attacks on Hawk and I for being Veterans, especially me for being an Iraq War Vet (they even dragged out “No blood for oil”).

There were a lot of videos of Paul tiptoeing the line of trutherism and they have magically disappeared in the last couple months. Its hard to hide stuff that happens in a debate though.

Yeah. I didn’t think so. If it was so prevalent, it should be easy for you to find. Because I don’t believe they exist, I have no motivation to provide evidence for your allegations.

FWIW, I’m an Iraq war vet too and I have seen other vets that support Ron Paul get attacked as fakes, etc. So it definitely goes both ways.

I actually quit supporting the war shortly after Obama took office because it was clear he didn’t care about winning and soldiers were dying while we were spinning our wheels. I just started supporting Paul recently, but Bachmann was my first choice. Watching her get torn down by conservatives really opened my eyes to what the GOP is all about, and it ain’t about electing a fiscal conservative.

Clearly you missed all the other Paul threads. Hawk and I have hit almost all of them. The racist newsletters threads were the best. “Whats wrong with what he said?” Yes, they were that bad. Galt like to tell people he disagrees with to STFU.

Logboy on February 6, 2012 at 9:20 PM

So I guess you are unable to back this up? You have already been far more insulting to me than I have to you so thanks, I guess, for helping to prove my original point.

I notice you made no comment on what was said to me on this thread. Not that I really care, but don’t act like it isn’t there.

hawkdriver on February 7, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Please recall the original allegation regarding Paul supporters:

Clearly you missed all the other Paul threads. Hawk and I have hit almost all of them. The racist newsletters threads were the best. “Whats wrong with what he said?” Yes, they were that bad. Galt like to tell people he disagrees with to STFU.

Logboy on February 6, 2012 at 9:20 PM

So failing that, I get an allegation about “blood for oil” and no, that didn’t happen either and THEN I get accused of lying about serving in Iraq. Now you want me to take notice of some comments directed towards you to prove what? Logboy has already shown himself unable to carry on a discussion without resorting to insults. I think his responses have done nothing but reinforce my original point.

So you proved he said STFU? THAT is your evidence for painting all Ron Paul supporters that comment on HA with the broad brush of being uncivil extremists? C’mon. Besides, I thought you were going to produce some evidence of some Paul supporter praising the racist comments in the newsletters.

So failing that, I get an allegation about “blood for oil” and no, that didn’t happen either and THEN I get accused of lying about serving in Iraq. Now you want me to take notice of some comments directed towards you to prove what? Logboy has already shown himself unable to carry on a discussion without resorting to insults. I think his responses have done nothing but reinforce my original point.

And I never accused you of lying. I said prove you served in Iraq, and you stated denying and offered up nothing. No unit, no MOS, no time period, no mission, no base, etc. Apparently we’re supposed to just “trust” you.

You made the allegation, you prove it. Again, I don’t see anything about blood for oil. Instead of linking me to a page of 100 comments, why not directly quote where someone said something about blood for oil or supported the racist comments in the newsletter. It’s ok to admit when you are wrong.

I don’t think it’s possible to “prove” anything here without protecting anonymity, and you obviously don’t trust me. I’m not sure who made you the arbiter of truth regarding claims of military service made in the comments section, especially when I have no “proof” of your service, but then, I am willing to trust you even though you don’t grants me the same courtesy.

FWIW:13F, March 2003-Feb 2004. Arifjan for two months, then the APOD/APOE for two months, then 7 months in Camp Cedar II near Nasariyah. Part of a NG base defense unit (MP’s engineers, artillery). Ended up doing Intel analysis in Iraq though not school trained.

You made the allegation, you prove it. Again, I don’t see anything about blood for oil. Instead of linking me to a page of 100 comments, why not directly quote where someone said something about blood for oil or supported the racist comments in the newsletter. It’s ok to admit when you are wrong.

iwasbornwithit on February 7, 2012 at 1:08 AM

Are you kidding me? Seriously. Tell me this is a stupid joke. You dont know search a simple thread so you accuse me of being a liar? Try “Ctrl + F” then type in “oil” and hit enter.

This is the last damn time I help you search for anything. Do your own homework. You show up months late to the party then expect me to spend the next hour explaining everything YOU missed. And yet you claimed you kept track of both sides of the Paul debate. Thats B.S. If you had you would have already known about Dante and Pitchforkers comments in the above thread, and the lewd remarks by JohnGalt23 all over HA. FAIL on your part.